News Photo by Steve Schulwitz Alpena County Deputy Clerk Michelle McGirr works at her desk on Friday. The clerk’s office handles many Freedom of Information Act requests sent to the county. In 2024, Alpena County filled 171 of the 175 FOIA requests it received.

ALPENA — Last year, local governments in Northeast Michigan filled a high percentage of the Freedom of Information Act requests they received and charged little or nothing to do so.

In celebration of Sunshine Week, The News reviewed information provided by local governments in the paper’s four-county coverage area to gauge the scope of their FOIA responsibilities.

A FOIA request is a legal request for public information, like emails or other important documents, from the government, government departments, or other government entities.

The state does not allow FOIA of its legislators and the governor’s office, so no data was available for local representatives in Lansing.

The information shows that all of the local governments fill a large majority of the requests for information they receive. FOIA requests that weren’t filled were because the information didn’t exist, was unavailable, or the person who filed the request canceled it.

It should come as little surprise that Alpena County received the most FOIA requests. In data shared with The News, it shows the county received 175 requests for public information, of which, 171 were filled. The four requests that weren’t completed were due to the cost or availability of the requested information, County Administrator Jesse Osmer said.

Despite filling the 171 FOIA requests, the county generated little revenue from the FOIA process. In total, the county only collected $284 in revenue from FOIA.

That equates to only about $1.66 per request.

Osmer said the county takes the FOIA process seriously and respects the rights of citizens to receive the public information they are entitled to.

Osmer said when there is a fee, it is based on how long it will take to gather the requested information and redact any information that is allowable by law.

FOIA requests can range from free to thousands of dollars, depending on their complexity.

“Nearly all of them were performed for free due to the lack of time it took, or the fee waived for other reasons,” he said.

The average cost of a completed FOIA request in Alpena Township was a touch higher than Alpena County’s but it is unknown how much time and information gathering was needed to process the requests.

According to Clerk Michele Palevich, the township received 48 FOIA requests and 45 of them were filled. The township received a total of $217 in total revenue from FOIA, which equates to $4.82 each.

Palevich said two FOIA requests were denied because either the requested items no longer exist or never existed. One request was not processed because the required down payment was not received.

Rogers City had on a touch more than one dozen FOIA requests in 2024. Terri Koss, clerk/treasurer said the city received 18 FOIA requests and 14 were fulfilled.

She explained the reasons why some were not filled. She said estimates were sent for three of the requests and no payments were received so the requests were closed after 45 days. Another request was canceled by the person who made the FOIA request.

In total, Rogers City received only $30.18 in FOIA revenue which equals to about $2.15 on average, per FOIA that was filled.

Alcona County received about $400 for the 45 FOIA requests that it received. In all, the county received 50 requests that, on average, cost the person who submitted the request about $8.

Montmorency County received only 11 FOIA requests and filled nine of them. It collected $41.50 from the requests that were filled, which equates to the county charging, on average, about $4.61 each.

Outside of Alpena County, Alpena has the largest population and it is reasonable to think the city receives a significant number of FOIA requests each year. Alpena Clerk Anna Soik said it was nearly impossible to determine what the total FOIA totals were for last year because the FOIA requests are destroyed after only one year. That means any FOIA requests received in January through mid-March of this year are no longer in the city’s system.

Alpena is abiding by state law, however.

The State of Michigan Records Management Services Department dictates the document schedules and, on its website, it shows the city is in compliance with FOIA laws.

The state website local municipalities must retain the FOIA information until it is filled or denied, plus one year.

As it has for many years, state legislators and the governor’s office are exempt from FOIA. There seemed to be some promise that that law would be changed early this year after the State Senate passed a bill opening up FOIA for legislators and the governor’s office 33-2, with State Sen. Michele Hoitenga, R-Manton, who represents Northern Michigan, voted for the FOIA bill in the State Senate.

When the bill was forwarded to the State House, however, it was not brought to the House floor for a vote. House Speaker Matt Hall, R-Richland Township, said during a roundtable with reporters in January that people should not expect action on FOIA soon.

“You’re not going to see fast action on the FOIA stuff from me in the House,” he told reporters. “You’re just not.”

By not allowing FOIA requests for many in Lansing, it denies residents access to critical information.

Michigan, along with Massachusetts, are the only two states that don’t allow FOIA for its legislators or governor and ranks last by the Center for Public Integrity.

State Rep. Cam Cavitt, R-Cheboygan, has a different view than the Speaker of the House. He said he has expressed his support for FOIA for all and he will continue to push for more state government transparency.

“If our townships and cities can abide by FOIA, there’s no reason the Legislature should not be held to the same standard,” he said. “As drain commissioner, I was subject to FOIA. I worked directly with property owners and officials and there were never any problems. The system worked. I don’t see any reason why that same system can’t work for the legislature and governor’s office.”